Was he screwed out of going?

[Kitten in the box]

My young cousin has a bad habit of "standing up for himself" at the wrong time. Tonight, he got his 15 year old self in trouble. His aunt said "if xxx is damAged do to your stupidity, then lll cut up your season pass to great America right in front of you." He responded with "ill hand you the scissors." Now she said " don't count on going tomorrow."

He told me this means he still might go. I told him " it basically means you're screwed on going." Who is right?

[AccountingDrone]

Screwed, blued and tattooed in a manner of speaking.

When someone tells you that they are willing to trash a seasons pass [however much it costs] and then tells you not to count on going - not going. She is beyond pissed at the kid right now. If he keeps his head down for a couple weeks she might change her mind but he doesn't sound like he would be able to.

[Seshat]

Depends on her personality and his behaviour, IMO.

[hinakiba777]

Not sure what might have been damaged, and how it's his fault so I can't speak on that really. But I have found initial punishments are usually really harsh, but if you keep your head down the person may come around. The scissors comment definitely ruined it for him.

[sms001]

He may be screwed just for, as you say, "standing up for himself at the wrong time" (or in this case, the wrong way) but being too flippant to elders aside, it sounds to me like he was just really confident that he had not, in fact, caused the damage to xxx.

Let us know if he gets to go.

More fun on not-so-clever teeners in this thread from catcul.

[yeahwhatev]

It's simply a matter of respect. If he had apologized and retracted the defiance, he might have gotten it. The parent is in the right in this matter. Backtalk is backtalk. "Standing up for yourself" is not being disrespectful when you are angry.

[kibbles]

I just always had a problem with people destroying or threatening to destroy people's possessions as a form of punishment.

I am in no way to judge how a parent disciplines, but that type of punishment just did not make sense to me IMO.

[Bright_Star]

He wasn't "standing up for himself", he was being disrespectfull.

[AnaKhouri]

'Screwed out of going' seems to imply that he was unjustly made to not go, possibly by deceit.

Not being allowed to go because he was being disciplined isn't being screwed out of anything, it's being punished.

[MoonCat]

He wasn't "standing up for himself", he was being disrespectfull.

I agree with this. Even if he was blamed for something he didn't do, the way to handle it is to politely and respectfully explain what really happened, not to mouth off until mom lowers the boom.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

I just always had a problem with people destroying or threatening to destroy people's possessions as a form of punishment.

I am in no way to judge how a parent disciplines, but that type of punishment just did not make sense to me IMO.

I agree if the person bought the item themselves. Then it's just vandalism.

If mom/dad bought that season pass for him then I am totally okay with her or him threatening to destroy/withhold said season pass.

[Jester]

I just always had a problem with people destroying or threatening to destroy people's possessions as a form of punishment.

That's great if Nephew bought the pass himself. But considering he's 15 and what those passes go for, I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that it was bought by the parents. Therefore, it is their possession that they are allowing him to use, and as such, they have every right to destroy it.

[kibbles]

I can understand withholding/selling/giving away..I don't know..destroying property as a form of punishment whether bought by the parents or not always struck a nerve with me IMO. JMO of course.

[sstabeler]

to be honest, I can sort of see Kibbles point. the punishment is depriving them of the item- does it need to be destroyed in front of them? It seems to be rubbing salt into the wound, so to speak. (not to mention, why not simply yank it for a month, say, rather than permanantly?)

[mathnerd]

That's great if Nephew bought the pass himself. But considering he's 15 and what those passes go for, I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that it was bought by the parents. Therefore, it is their possession that they are allowing him to use, and as such, they have every right to destroy it.

There's a vast difference between "you've been rude and disrespectful and as a consequence, you will not be allowed to use the season pass to Great America", and "I'm going to destroy something that belongs to you".

As the child of parents who's philosophy was "you don't own anything, not even your underwear", I have major problems with this. When you buy something for somebody, it's a gift. It's theirs and destroying it is destroying their possessions. Destroying somebody's possessions does nothing to breed respect or compliance. It breeds resentment and actually encourages a lack of compliance.

Beyond that, if you want respectful children, you should be modeling respectful behavior. I don't think that destruction of property as a form of "punishment" falls into that category.

That said, I think both the parent and the child were unquestionably rude.